On the female side of the equation you have:
- Anti-natalist propaganda telling women having several children is selfish.
- Anti-natalist propaganda telling women that having kids takes up your time better spent having fun, travelling, drinking, experimenting, etc.
- Anti-natalist propaganda telling women that settling down with a man and a family prevents their sexual liberation and their capacity to 'try every flavour' with an (((accent))) on the 'exotic'.
- Third-wave feminist propaganda telling women that their time is better spent in the boardroom and treating men as inferior.
- Rising costs which make women anxious as to how they will fund child-raising. They are therefore all in competition for the richer men of which the % is dwindling.
- Etc.

On the male side:
- Wage compression making it harder to support a family and present yourself to women as a viable life partner for child-raising.
- Rising anger and anxiety over the current situation and life in general making them less appealing targets for women who are used to seeing laid-back, carefree men on the TV, in magazines, etc.
- Rising anger against women promulgated by (((them))) to divide us. This is done by (((their))) support of third-wave feminism. Despondency is also an issue.
- Competing for the few women who are racially minded AND want kids (although the two tend to go hand-in-hand).
- Etc.

I found myself once on a date with a British woman who was 26yo (myself being 27). She was a solid 7 out of 10. At the time, I was working a financial audit job for a big 4 accounting firm. As such, I had very little time for anything social. Despite my heavy reservations, I jumped on tinder as it solved the time problem (though evidently not the quality problem as we're about to see).

Anyway, this girl was blonde and blue-eyed and had come from the countryside where she had led a relatively sheltered life. She was working as a manager for nurses who visit the elderly in homes (she had previously been working as such a nurse herself). So we went on a date.

I have found subtle ways of enquiring as to who a girl has been with in the past and what her sexual history might be like. I managed to discover that this particular girl had burned the coal having moved from the countryside to London. She was even proud of it. Her explanation was 'well it's not unusual given London is a multicultural city'.

Suffice it to say there was no second date.

Bizarrely enough however, she was anti-islam and anti-Sharia law so there was that but my over-riding thought? 'I'm not venturing where the groid has planted his flag (so-to-speak) before me'.

Who is giving them more crap? I'm certainly not advocating for it. Like I said, by giving them minority status, you enable giving them more for nothing. Who pushes for equating them to an oppressed minority? (((Who indeed)))...

@Lester Cordell re-read what I wrote. I said breastfeeding in public (which is currently legal so not giving them anything new) is perfectly natural and acceptable. I said that we should make them feel comfortable in having more children. I'm not espousing giving them more of anything that doesn't aid that objective.

Here's what I think: the breastfeeding debate was put out there by the media (in the UK at least) to make a big deal out of something that was of little consequence and was virtually a non-issue. Why was this done? To antagonise both the male and female side of the equation so that they would be further divided. This would support the pro-third wave feminist issue and the angry/anxious side of men that generally repels women (see above) thus driving the wedge between us even further which ultimately serves to drive down birth rates. It is part of a multi-faceted attack on male-female relationships, communication and understanding (other examples include purposeful gender confusion, the wage gap myth, the campus rape culture myth, etc).

Personally, I think a lot of women don't breastfeed in public precisely because they don't like the idea of displaying themselves and an intimate connection between mother and child. men don't like it for almost precisely the same reason (plus it can be viewed as a gratuitous display of course). Who pushes the idea that woman can, and therefore SHOULD, breastfeed in public (therefore prompting antagony and friction between both sides)? (((Who))) indeed...

Again, I'll use the UK as an example as it is what I know; males hailing from the third world commit a disproportionate amount of the sexual crime. The media relays this to the public as being purely a 'male' problem and overlooks the foreign element completely. Thus, they drive the wedge even further. Who controls the media? (((Who))) indeed...

@everyone the team is busy atm making this place as excellent as possible. I'll be free this weekend to get on the vetting so things will open up a bit more in a couple of days. Please bear with us. Patience is a (White) virtue.